What if the Netherlands used FPTP?

Examining the difference in election outcome between FPTP and D’Hondt (proportional representation).

Header photo by -JvL- is licensed with CC BY 2.0. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/

In this short article I am exploring what the Dutch political landscape would look like if it operated under a first-past-the-post (FPTP) system.

The election data for the Netherlands was downloaded from the Kiesraad.

Results Tweede Kamer Verkiezing 2017

These are the 2017 results summarised:

party	votes	seats	percentage
VVD	2238351	33	21.6
PVV	1372941	20	13.2
CDA	1305217	19	12.6
D66	1288794	19	12.4
GROENLINKS	960685	14	9.3
SP	955633	14	9.2
PvdA	599692	9	5.8
ChristenUnie	356376	5	3.4
PvdD	335511	5	3.2
Partij 50PLUS	327494	4	3.2
DENK	216241	3	2.1
SGP	218978	3	2.1
FvD	187388	2	1.8

Let’s start with examining the composition of the Tweede Kamer - under a proportional representation (D’Hondt) system. This is what the Tweede Kamer looks like currently:

Now let’s have a look at what it would look like under First-past-the-Post (FPTP), with one MP elected per Gemeente.

Now, there are a couple of obvious differences:

• The VVD has an absolute majority, despite only having 21.6% of the vote.
• There are a lot more seats in this fictional house.

But also some obvious caveats:

• Each Gemeente has a different population, but here Amsterdam and Appingedam are represented equally. In the UK, with its FPTP system, constituencies are somewhat based on population. For example London has 73 MPs, while Scotland has 59 MPs.

Election results on a map

We can also show these results on a map - this in an interactive map which allows you to explore the individual election results for each Gemeente.